John i. 1. “And the word was God." A.V.
And the word was divine.
No other rendering does exact justice to the text. The writer makes a marked distinction between God as it stands here, and God as it stands immediately before. The difference consists in this, that in the latter case, theos has the article; in the former case it is without the article. With the article‘, namely, ho theos, God is meant; but theos without the article, does not mean God absolutely. We may possibly render this distinction clear to the English reader, thus—
En arché én ho logos, kai ho logos én pros ton theon,
In (the) beginning was the word, and the word was near the God,
kai theos en ho logos.
and a god was the word.
This is a strictly literal rendering. Now the force of the article ho, as determining the specific meaning of a word, is seen by its being here prefixed to logos, which, without the article, signifies word, a word, any word; but with the article, the word, the word of God, the divine word. So theos without the article ho, god, means a divinity; it may be a heathen divinity, as it is used by St. Paul in 1 Cor. viii. 5, “gods many," and, in general, denotes one who possesses divine qualities. Had John intended to describe the word as the Supreme God, he would have used the article. Instead of doing so, he makes a marked distinction between “God" and "the word," calling the former ho theos, and the latter theos. The distinction is altogether lost in the received version. It has indeed been said that theos, in the last case, could not have the article, since it is the attribute, and not the subject. The remark is made in ignorance. Attributives often have the article, and the article they must have when the sense requires the article. We need not go further than the first chapter of John’s Gospel, e. g.—
Houtos estin ho hiuos tou theou.
This is the son of the (supreme) God.
Here “the son" is the attribute to the subject “this." So also in “The life was the light of men;" (4) “He was not the light;" (8) “He was the true light;" (9) “I am not the Christ;" (20) “Art thou the prophet?" (21.) The testimony of the prince of New Testament grammarians is clear and emphatic, in confirmation of our translation. Winer declares, “The article could not have been omitted if John had intended to designate the word as God absolutely (ho theos), since in the connexion the word ‘God’ would then have had a double meaning. But that John purposely wrote theos (not ho theos), is taught by the sharply, defined opposition in pros ton theon (“near" or “with God"), as well as his whole description of the Logos. As, then, John purposely makes this distinction, so he must here be understood to deny the proper or absolute deity of the Word.
......................
From Notes and Queries (Vol. 13, No. 2, February 1895), Edited by S.C. Gould
The Logos Of Saint John. Where did John find the doctrine of The Word, The Logos, and what is it? En arche en ho Logos, kai ho Logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho Logos. "In a beginning was the word, and the word was with the God, and a god was the word."— Emphatic Diaglott. Student.
Reply: The doctrine of the Logos is one that requires volumes; and on it volumes have been written. Bishop Marsh, in his "Michaelis," says:
"Since, therefore, St. John has adopted several other terms used by the Gnostics, we must conclude that he derived also the term Logos from the same source. If it be further asked, Whence did the Gnostics derive the use of the expression, 'Word'? I answer, that they derived it most propably from the Oriental or Zoroastrian philosophy, from which was borrowed a considerable part of the Manichean doctrines. In the Zendavesta we meet with a being called 'The Word' who was not only prior in existence, but gave birth to Ormuzd, the creator of good; and to Ahriman, the creator of evil. It is true, that the work which we have at present under the title of Zendavesta is not the ancient and genuine Zendavesta; but it certainly contains many ancient and genuine Zoroastrian doctrines. It is said, likewise, that the Indian philosophers have their Logos, which, according to their doctrines, is the same as the Monogenes."
Godfrey Higgins says Wisdom was the first emanation from the Divine power, the Protogonus, the beginning of all things, the Rasit of Genesis, the Buddha of India, the Logos of Plato and St. John, and the beginning of Creation. Indeed, some translations read: "In Wisdom God created the planets and the earth."
The Gospel of St. Peter says: "God has made the the heaven and the earth by the Principle." That is wisdom, the Hypostasis.
For a list of all of my disks, ebooks and downloads, with links click here
See also The Trinity Doctrine & Christology - Over 320 Books on the on TWO DVDroms and Unitarianism & Universalism - 100 Books on DVDrom
No comments:
Post a Comment